Jonathan Wells makes the case for the end of preferential government treatment for GCSEs over Functional Skills

Functional Skills (FS) are not the ‘easy option’, they are much more rigorous than GCSEs when it comes to application of skills, pass marks are significantly higher and the focus is on the application of basic skills in real life practical situations, rather than academic theories.

More than 45 per cent of learners entering the sector do so without having achieved maths and English at grade A to C GCSE, and of those, the majority have a grade D — that’s 122,000 learners in maths and another 118,000 in English (an astonishing 26 per cent of all boys in GCSE English achieve grade D).

While GCSE suits those with an academic aspiration, there are many problems with delivering GSCE in the post-16 sector.

For example, where are the qualified GCSE teachers/tutors in the post-16 sector? GCSE has just two windows of opportunity for examination per year — how does this fit with the roll-on, roll-off nature of many vocational courses? On a practical level, if a training provider does deliver the learning for GCSE successfully, where does the learner take the exam? JCQ requirements on exam centres are incredibly strict and few private training providers have the facilities to manage the strict JCQ requirements for GCSE exams.

So what about those learners in the sixth and seventh decile of academic achievement? This is the group that forms the core of the ‘vocational learners’ who go on to apprenticeships, typically at level two and three.

In this category, employers do not seek GCSE, instead the Education and Training Foundation Report published in March 2015 found that FS are the qualification of choice for employers who know about them.

Many young people will struggle to get an apprenticeship position. For example a quick look on the new Government service — www.findapprenticeship.service.gov.uk — shows on the first few pages for Durham three jobs requiring GCSE A to C in maths and English for level two intermediate apprenticeships. Why do jobs like this impose a minimum GCSE requirement? Could it be that employers and providers are keen to avoid having to deliver maths and English to learners?

In an age where a provider’s success is judged on retention and achievement rates, and where their income is influenced by learner’s success, is it any wonder that providers are seeking to reduce the chance of failure or of learners simply leaving?

Achieving grade C is not simply a matter of ‘trying until you pass’.

If that was the case, they would have achieved this at school.

Ultimately, success for most learners in the sixth and seventh decile of academic achievement is all about getting a successful career.

This typically means vocational learning supported by good, practical English and maths skills that support their job and aspirations.

FS as part of an individualised appropriate and relevant study programme are most often the best means of achieving this aim.

After all, what seems the best scenario — a level two FS qualification that is acceptable and indeed welcomed by employers or a grade D GCSE that is seen as a failure?

 

Mapped out long-term career paths in technical or leadership roles are just some of the propositions facing apprentice at Sweett Group, Doulas McCormick outlines how and why such attractive professional offers are being put before earners and learners.

The latest report from the UKCES talks of the Death of the Saturday Job, with more students than ever turning away from part-time work in favour of focussing on exam results and grades.

While this may appear to be a logical course of action to boost employment prospects, the simple fact is — it isn’t.

Research from UKCES has repeatedly shown that what employers really value is experience. Last year UKCES carried out a survey of 18,000 UK employers, of all those that had recruited in the past 12 months two thirds (66 per cent) said having work experience was a critical or significant factor in their decisions. By opting for grades over experience, young people are pitching themselves to the minority.

Experience is clearly more than just a checkbox on the employer wish list. So how do apprenticeships stand up as a solution?

The apprenticeship programme has been hugely successful for Sweett Group, but this success has not been without its share of challenges

Having started my own career as an apprentice, I have first-hand experience of the benefits that apprenticeship programmes bring to businesses, and society as a whole.

In 2014, Sweett Group launched its Quantity Surveying Apprenticeship Programme, in partnership with The Construction Industry Training Board and Havering College. So far the programme has recruited 10 apprentices, and is looking to recruit a further 10 in September.

The apprenticeship programme has been hugely successful for Sweett Group, but this success has not been without its share of challenges.

Putting in place an effective structure and rolling out the delivery of a high quality apprenticeship programme is time-consuming. However, the benefits outweigh the challenges, as businesses are left with trained young people that have hands-on business experience who will make for better, more productive employees.

One of the major benefits of an apprenticeship is a stronger, longer lasting link between employees and employers. Indeed, research shows two thirds of apprentices stay on with their employer after completing their apprenticeship.

At Sweett Group, we have implemented structured apprenticeship programmes, which involve mapped out long-term career paths in technical or leadership roles. Beyond this we also have dedicated and trained mentors; we’ve put in place rotation schemes, have regular group training sessions and Q&As with senior practitioners, and provide intense personal and pastoral support.

It is clear the government’s current skills priorities focus on apprenticeships. Although welcome, their ambition to create 3m new apprenticeships must not be achieved at the expense of quality.

One solution is for employers to take charge, enabled by government, to develop sector-based approaches that result in apprenticeships being a high-quality earning and learning career pathway for young people and a normal way for businesses to recruit and develop their future talent.

We are already seeing evidence of sector-based approaches in the form of ‘Trailblazing’ groups of employers in England that are designing new apprenticeship standards and assessment approaches.

 

Dr Ann Limb presents five reasons to be cheerful about skills, devolution and localism over the next five years.

I’ve worked with — and for — Conservative, Labour, and Coalition governments. It is from this perspective that I predict the next five to 10 years could be the most exciting, challenging, and potentially the most creative and productive, for FE colleges and independent learning providers (ILPs).

So here’s why. Firstly, the long campaign to raise the status of technical, vocational and professional training is succeeding, epitomized in part by the cross party political consensus on the importance, value and prioritisation of the apprenticeship route to skills acquisition and employment.

There will undoubtedly be significant issues about achieving an arbitrarily determined numerical manifesto pledge and the sector will be judged on how it responds to this. Nonetheless there are opportunities to be seized here — a chance to use renewed interest in apprenticeships to position providers positively in a reconfigured system. Secondly, the sector’s leadership is mature, confident, collaborative and outward looking — and more joined-up than ever.

The new government has quickly demonstrated its unequivocal ideological penchant for the devolution of power and budgets to local level

National organisations such as the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, Association of Colleges, the 157 Group and the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education. I experience a much greater willingness of late for the leadership of the major national bodies to work together, and in partnership with employers and Leps, where there is common ground.

Thirdly, the new government has quickly demonstrated its unequivocal ideological penchant for the devolution of power and budgets to local level — with attendant accountability for growth and economic development resting largely on the shoulders of local authorities working with their private sectors partners in Leps, employer membership bodies, and trades unions. This presents a golden opportunity for skills providers to capitalise on their established pre-eminence with their local constituents, employers and businesses.

Any lack of national profile generally for post-16 sector skills providers when compared to schools and universities, is offset by the overwhelmingly positive regard in which FE colleges and ILPs are held in their local communities.

Fourthly, devolution and localism offer a significant strategic opportunity for the post 14-education system to be re-shaped for the long term — with regard to funding, operational delivery, and local business engagement. It remains to be seen whether government will be bold in its thinking on this or whether it will continue to reconfigure the sector through a prolonged series of salami-sliced funding cuts, like those recently announced.

I was a college principal in 1992 when the last Conservative majority government demonstrated the vision, courage and muscle to lead the sector into incorporation. As the sector comes of age, I urge current Ministers to be as reforming as their political forebears.

Finally — and this is something the sector should take pride in — vocational skills are no longer the forgotten third child of the educational system. FE colleges and ILPs alike have shaken off their ‘Billy no-mates’ image and can demonstrate a growing track record of success. ILPs and FE colleges have friends, admirers, and advocates at all levels — locally, nationally and internationally.

 

Apprenticeship reforms remain on the agenda and could be even more important as the government seeks to hit its 3m starts target. Rebecca Rhodes outlines the reform situation.

The importance of apprenticeships to productivity and growth in the economy is evidenced by the government’s continued commitment to ensure employers lead the development of high quality apprenticeships, and have the purchasing power to decide where investment is made.

With the government now setting a target of 3m apprenticeships in the next five years, and recent commitments announced to make the apprenticeship brand enshrined in law, it is even more important that everyone with a role in delivering the new apprenticeship programme works together.

More than 1,200 employers are directly involved in developing the new apprenticeship standards as part of the Trailblazer programme.

Providers are at the heart of ensuring that apprenticeship delivery through employers is a reality

The apprenticeship standard is the foundation of apprenticeship reform. So far, 24 standards, developed by employer groups, have been approved and made available for delivery. The next announcement of new standards ready for delivery, plus those to be developed, by August, with more to follow in the new academic year.

Employer groups are working on more than 260 standards, and this rolling development process will continue throughout 2015 and 2016, ensuring coverage of key occupations in a wide range of sectors over the next academic year.

As the longer-term model for apprenticeship develops over the summer, for employers and providers wanting to start delivering apprenticeship standards, the funding model used in 2014 to 2015 has been extended to cover the 2015 to 2016 academic year.

A key principle of the future of apprenticeships is that employers invest financially, and in the 2014 to 2016 model, the government will match this employer investment up to a cap set by the SFA — in the ratio of one third employer financial investment matched by two thirds government investment.

Employers are also, where eligible, entitled to up to three incentive payments, paid directly to them through their chosen lead provider. Providers starting delivery of apprenticeship standards in 2015 to 216 will, as now, use existing data collection routes as the underpinning payment and earnings system. Providers also use the apprenticeship standards funding rules, developed for the Trailblazer apprenticeship.

Providers are at the heart of ensuring that apprenticeship delivery through employers is a reality. Employers will continue to want the advice and expertise available from their apprenticeship provider to guide them. The lead provider is the employer’s key partner in every aspect of apprenticeship delivery; agreeing a price for training and assessment and subcontracting with other providers involved in delivery, and managing payment processes, including the incentive payments paid to employers.

From 2017 onwards, the future mechanism for apprenticeship funding for employers will be through a new online voucher. This will set out the discount for each apprentice. The funding policy that will define the value of each voucher is under development.

This new apprenticeship funding mechanism is part of a larger, employer-facing, digital apprenticeship resource.

The SFA is working with employers and providers to ensure that the new system design includes all the resources and tools to help employers make decisions about taking on an apprentice.

For example, employers will not only be able to register their apprentices and access the new voucher, but they will also use the system to gather information about all apprenticeship standards and search for details of suitable providers.

 

Jason Holt’s 2012 report for government on getting more businesses taking on apprentices puts him in good position to assess the situation today. He considers the programme’s current situation and its future.

When I spoke to members of the AELP at their annual conference, I was asked to give an employer’s perspective on the future of apprenticeships and traineeships.

With a background as an employer, running my family’s jewellery business, but also now as a provider, running an academy offering diplomas, short courses, traineeships and apprenticeships, I feel well-equipped to comment on the sector, and the issues surrounding it.

As an employer I’ve always seen the value of apprenticeships. In my jewellery business almost half our staff are apprentices. At Holt’s Academy, the not-for-profit training enterprise I set up to reinvigorate the jewellery industry, we have seen hundreds of jewellery, business and technology apprentices go through our doors.

Transformation of apprenticeships through Trailblazers has been supported and investment has increased

This commitment and passion for apprenticeships, led me to accept a role as the apprenticeship ambassador for small business. I found that while 99 per cent of businesses in the UK are small and medium-sized enterprises, only 10 per cent of those have apprentices.

If we can get that to 20 per cent we would have the lowest rates of unemployment in Europe. It is a challenge well worth tackling.

In the last few years there have been great improvements.

The government’s commitment to apprenticeships was strong and consistent through the last parliament and the Ministerial appointments recently don’t seem to have dampened it. The transformation of apprenticeships through Trailblazers has been supported and investment has increased.

Introducing and retaining the AGE grant has been a very visible example of that, helping more small businesses take on their first apprentice. The introduction and expansion of higher apprenticeships allows young people to have a credible alternative to university and we are seeing employers like PWC, Lloyds Banking Group, Rolls Royce and BAE offering apprenticeships alongside graduate programmes.

We have seen the four big employer bodies; the CIPD, FSB, BCC and the CBI all actively working to raise awareness of the benefits of apprenticeships with their members. Employers are not just listening, they are talking to each other to learn what works and get tips and advice under the Apprenticeship Makers scheme. But, as ever, there is always more to do. The ambition is to create 3m apprentices. We have done really well to get small businesses thinking about apprenticeships and we’ve seen large employers engaging in greater numbers than ever before. Our next challenge is the medium businesses. We will only succeed in this if we get to a steady state quickly, and stay there. We have had many changes over the years and we need time for these to bed in and take effect. Changes not only disrupt well-working systems but confuse employers and risk disengagement.

This consistency theme continues around funding. The economy and the funding challenges faced by the FE sector require us to be prudent with investment. I remain convinced that we need a clear and consistent message to all businesses on the required level of employer investment, cash and in-kind, if we are to make it easier for them to engage.

 

The SFA has been entrusted with meeting the government’s target of 3m apprenticeships starts in England during this Parliament. Peter Lauener outlines measures to help reach the goal.

One of the government’s key manifesto commitments is to create 3m apprenticeships by 2020 in England. Last week, Richard Harrington MP was announced as the Prime Minister’s apprenticeships adviser to help the government achieve this commitment.

Creating 3m apprenticeship starts in the next five years is a challenge. But it’s achievable and meeting the target is an economic imperative. My team will be supporting the Prime Minister’s new apprenticeships adviser in his drive to secure greater engagement of employers in delivering more apprenticeships.

Providers must continue to improve the quality and responsiveness of the training to better meet employer needs

If we are to meet this Parliament’s 3m target, it is essential that apprenticeships are really owned and driven by employers.

More than 1,200 employers in over 100 sectors are already involved in the Trailblazer programme, which sees groups of employers designing new apprenticeship standards themselves. The aim is to increase the numbers and sectors involved, giving greater control to more employers, focusing particularly on new occupations where there have not been apprenticeships before.

And on both apprenticeships and traineeships, we need to work closely with all our partners to make both programmes a success.

There is a strong role for both FE colleges and independent learning providers in helping to stimulate demand from employers for apprenticeships. They must continue to improve the quality and responsiveness of the training to better meet employer needs.

But we also need more employers to get involved in apprenticeships for the first time. We have a successful base to build from — the number of workplaces involved in apprenticeships has grown from 173,600 in 2010/11 to 240,900 in 2013/14.

But there is definitely room for improvement — this still represents less than 14 per cent of the employer population.

As well as securing more apprenticeships in the private sector, the public sector has a key role to play.

Skills Minister Nick Boles has announced proposals for public bodies to lead by example and recruit more apprenticeships.

Everyone involved in apprenticeships will support the ambition for we want apprenticeships to be seen on an equal footing with university as routes to a successful career. That’s why the government is increasing the number of higher and degree apprenticeships, allowing apprentices to gain a full Bachelor’s or Master’s Degree while working and employers to shape the graduate/post-graduate level skills they need.

It is important that young people make informed choices about their future careers and are made aware of all of the options available. The National Careers Service ensures that young people are provided with advice about the benefits of and routes into apprenticeships and traineeships.

Achieving the 3m target will increase productivity growth in the economy by raising the overall level of skills and ensuring that the skills of the workforce best match the needs of employers.

The SFA will be doing everything we can to support the achievement of this critical ambition.

 

Ofqual recently outlined its plans for closing the unit databank as part of its ongoing work to withdraw the regulatory arrangements for the Qualification and Credit Framework (QCF). Andrew Gladstone-Heighton outlines his concerns.

Just to make it clear at the outset; I’ve been in the sector long enough to remember the introduction of the QCF (which means my FE career has now outlived two qualifications frameworks), so I’m fully aware that the QCF is in need of some reform.

However, from reading their plans, there are a number of things that need to be taken into consideration about what the proposals outlined will mean for the sector.

I do agree that removal of some the restrictions of the shared unit databank (and the regulatory arrangements of the QCF in general) will enable awarding organisations (AOs) to provide more creative and innovative responses to employer and learners needs — this is where AOs really add value to our qualification framework.

However, we have to bear in mind that this has been published in the middle of an ongoing Ofqual consultation, and following a period of intense and ongoing reform for vocational qualifications. Having previously set out their aspiration to withdraw the QCF rules in the 2015/16 session; I can’t help but get the impression that these reforms are being rushed through.

As they are currently set out by Ofqual, any changes or restrictions to AO accessing the unit databank may, in my opinion, lead to a situation where qualifications may have to be redeveloped as the shared content within them may be restricted to the original unit submitting body, should they choose to withdraw their content.

I can’t help but get the impression that these QCF reforms are being rushed through

 While it’s currently unclear as to whether this would mean the qualification would have to be resubmitted to the Ofqual register (with the new Qualification Accreditation Number that this usually entails), it may mean that learners and other stakeholders will face further changes to qualifications they are interested in studying.

There may be disruption in the qualifications available to learners as some component units of qualifications are no longer ‘available’ as shared units.

Also of concern is a potential increase in the volume of units available, as a version of each (now shared) unit becomes owned by each AO that offers it. Transferability between qualifications (a key concept of the QCF that I strongly support) may become harder to achieve as a consequence, as they will no longer be made up of transferable common content. This will place additional burdens on providers, AOs and employers when agreeing to and recognising any prior learning.

I have concerns, shared by SquareOneLaw, that the disentanglement of ‘ownership’ of shared and co-created units currently on the unit bank introduces the potential complexities posed by possession (or otherwise) of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). While it is acknowledged that IPR cannot be retrospectively attached to a product, there is no doubt some AOs may feel somewhat aggrieved that their hard work and financial investment channelled into shared unit development may now not be rewarded with reciprocal rewards, should some AOs choose to withdraw their content.

It is highly unlikely that small to medium-sized AOs have the appetite or the resources to fight one another over ownership. Ideally, we would want an industry-wide solution with perhaps contractual agreements between AOs and/or an open source arrangement, perhaps with Ofqual’s facilitation.

Another thing that is currently unclear is to what extent Ofqual’s reforms have been linked to the various funding agencies’ plans for qualification approval. From what I’ve heard, Ofqual is working with the relevant agencies where appropriate, and it would be a missed opportunity to align a new qualifications and unit funding system with the removal of shared units and withdrawal of the QCF rules more widely.

All of this may seem quite geeky and technical to the layperson, but if we are to secure confidence in vocational qualifications as a rigorous and responsive high quality alternative to academia with employers, learners and policy makers, then I fear the some of the unanswered questions above may undermine this noble aspiration.

 

The people have voted, the government has been formed and now the policies must be enacted. Martin Dunford outlines how the skills sector should respond to the challenges ahead, and how sector funding must also be looked at.

The AELP national conference is the first opportunity we have had to debate the plans that the new government has for employment and skills programmes.

Whatever your own political views, the result of the General Election means that we have some clear understanding of what is coming in policy terms and even the same Skills Minister in Nick Boles.

Our preference is for early confirmation of key policies and the changes that they will entail, and then hope for a period of real stability in terms of policymaking.

The reappointment of Mr Boles is very encouraging because, as City & Guild’s ‘Sense and Instability’ report last year showed, responsibility for skills has been bedevilled by numerous machinery of government changes and an endless succession of ministers. Nevertheless, announcements in the last couple of weeks around budgets and programme growth show the focus on government spending will mean that overall budget levels for employment and skills will be under constant pressure over the next five years.

Many of the key proposals AELP made in our own manifesto are reflected in this government’s plans but as always the devil is in the detail and it is how these issues are implemented that will be the key factor on whether these policies will be successful. It is important that the organisations delivering these programmes are involved in the policy development and definitely the implementation of those policies.

The ten points in the AELP manifesto still remain our key drivers and the highest profile policy push has been the drive to increase the numbers of apprenticeship starts. Employment and skills were also very high profile in the election campaign and they were one of the first things the Prime Minister listed in his acceptance speech and at the first Cabinet meeting. These policy areas have arguably never had such a high profile and it’s the efforts of providers and employers that have got them to the top of the agenda. We know that apprenticeships will be at the core of the challenge for us but providers will also be involved in the delivery of full employment and the new approach to getting young people into work.

The challenge has been underlined by recent announcements about £900m cuts from next year’s budgets and deferral of growth proposals. But if we are to be at the centre of these policies’ implementation, then we have to be positive and constructive about what we need to deliver for employers and individuals. There is now an understanding that spending on employment and skills is an investment and not a cost to individuals, employers and the UK economy but we know that investment will be under huge scrutiny. We know there will continue to be a drive to deliver more for less but we need stability of policy, longer term contract commitments and more realistic funding to be able to take that longer term view and develop plans that build confidence in our sector.

Contract reform means addressing the Skills Funding Agency’s guidance that providers over-deliver at their own risk, ie they won’t necessarily get funded for any additional delivery. To achieve 3m apprenticeships, more delivery has to be encouraged by providers with a proven track record.

We have a real opportunity to build on the growing confidence employers and learners have in vocational pathways. Young people and their parents are now considering different routes to high level skills.

We have to build on this change and working with government, we can together continuously improve delivery, outcomes and penetration of the employer market.